We need a designated sandbox for our intellectual midgets, Bumphrey Hogart and Neil Obstat, to go play in together.

We need a designated sandbox for our intellectual midgets, Bumphrey Hogart and Neil Obstat, to go play in together.

Yea, maybe gravity will keep them in the box.

How many of you have sailed across an ocean before?  I have.  When I was approaching land, I saw it low on the horizon, and as I got closer it grew taller.  I'm pretty sure that means the earth is round. 

How many of you have sailed across an ocean before?  I have.  When I was approaching land, I saw it low on the horizon, and as I got closer it grew taller.  I'm pretty sure that means the earth is round.

Well, now this one is just silly.
I'll show you how:
In my city, we have a large valley that is ringed by mountains on three sides, with one small but tallish mountain in the center.
On my side of the valley, I am up a little bit on the side of the mountain, and if I look at the mountain in the center, it appears to be only at eye-level, even though it is only about 6 miles away. Does that mean the mountain is only 5 1/2 feet tall (my height)? No, of course not. If I could instantly teleport myself to the location at the base of the mountain, it would "grow taller" as I got closer, and standing at its base I would suddenly find that the mountain is actually 2,700 feet high! 
The phenomenon of the mountain looking shorter on the horizon the further you get away from it is due to perspective - NOT curvature.

How many of you have sailed across an ocean before?  I have.  When I was approaching land, I saw it low on the horizon, and as I got closer it grew taller.  I'm pretty sure that means the earth is round.

I have sailed across an ocean.
Would you be able to explain how that disproves the flat earth?

Geometry and science is logical, and all you have is a warped wishful thinking to the contrary.
We know that on a plane, without refraction, the only perspective change is distance, making a full object be totally in view, only smaller the further away it is. We know what the refraction rate of the atmosphere is, it is not a mystery. There is no way a full mountain is below the horizon due to refraction. Break out of your fantasy.

.
The problem with this kind of post is, around flat-earthers, you're trying to be reasonable and work off of real life experience and logical inquiry, but they're only interested in repeating patently false premises like, "It's all explained by perspective," and "The horizon rises to the eye of the viewer," both of which are false, obviously. Perspective disproves flat-earthism and the horizon stays right where it is when the viewer changes elevation.
.
I took a builder's level to the top of Mount Whitney and set it up to find that my line of sight was higher than every peak within view, and my scope pointed with level crosshairs into the clouds above Death Valley, 50 miles away. But for flat-earthers, such reporting is heresy. Maybe I ought to be burned at the stake!
.
Everything we can see and test on a small scale they say suddenly disappears when you go to a large scale. They claim the mountains in the distance are not in view because we cannot see past the horizon even when objects below the horizon would be in a straight line of sight if the earth were flat.
.
It doesn't help to tell them facts in your own experience because they won't believe your testimony, or when you show them photographs they say it must be Photoshop or CGI. So it will never make any difference what evidence you bring to the table, they'll immediately reject it without even thinking about it, so they say they can't be bothered, and then resort to insult and ad hominem. They do that because to die-hard flat-earthers, their flat earthism is a false god that they worship, then they prattle on and on in the name of the Holy Bible, but actually reading it is too difficult for them, especially when it says things they don't want to hear.
.
If it were not so sad and pathetic, it would be really funny. But it's just sad and pathetic, sorry to say.
.

.
Take a nice, long look at the full moon tonight.
.
Notice it does not rise in the east until the sun goes down in the west.
.
Notice that it crosses the sky at a very high angle, nearly directly overhead.
.
Notice that it is at its highest point in the sky at astronomical midnight (1:00 am Daylight Savings Time).
.
Notice there is no shadow under the moon as one would expect to see if the sun were hovering nearby over a "flat" earth and shining across the surface of the earth to shine on the moon like this.
.
There is no shadow under the moon nor anywhere else on the edges of the moon.
.
But just a few days ago, there was a shadow on the eastern edge of the moon before it became full.
.
Why was that shadow there?
.
That shadow was there because the moon was not yet directly opposite the earth from the sun.
.
But the moon was well on its way, and NOW, it has ARRIVED.

.
Two days ago the full moon had no shadow on the underside as it would have if the sun were shining across a "flat" earth, but today, the moon is starting to show a shadow on the western side, and a little on top as well.
.
There was no shadow under the moon nor anywhere else on the edges of the moon, two days ago, and the absence of shadow under the moon continues to be the case during the first quarter, as the moon approaches the new moon phase.
.
As the moon approaches its first quarter (which will happen next week) the shadow on TOP of the moon gradually grows, but there is no shadow on the moon's bottom side (closest to earth). The quarter moon appears to be reclining toward the rising sun. If the earth were "flat" with the sun making its rounds over the surface of earth, the sun would not be shining from below the horizon, for it would have to be positioned below the earth's surface. But we know that when it's night here in the western hemisphere it's daylight in India and Asia, which is not on the bottom of a "flat" earth model. The angle of the sun's light comes from an impossible angle in the "flat" earth model, showing that it cannot be the truth.
.
Incidentally, the Western (Roman) Church has placed Easter in the week following the first full moon of spring for good reason. This was the case when Our Lord was crucified, under a full moon. Since a total solar eclipse can only occur during a new moon, we will never have such an eclipse in Easter Week, just as it could not have happened on Good Friday. Thus it is total fabrication to say that when the earth was darkened for 3 hours that day that the cause of that darkness was an eclipse of the sun. Such an eclipse could only happen two weeks later during the new moon phase. Besides, a total solar eclipse does not darken the whole world nor does it ever last for 3 hours. The longest total solar eclipse is no more than about 7 minutes.
.